Nato (Bases, Eastern Mediterranean)
1.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence whether, in view of the uncertainty in regard to the efficiency and use of the Suez Canal Defence Zone, he is considering with the other Governments of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Powers alternative bases inthe east Mediterranean
.
No, Sir.
Would it not be wise to regard Turkey as a more reliable base for defence arrangements at present than Egypt?
There is certainly something in what the hon. Gentleman says.
:Why does the hon. Gentleman reply in the negative? Surely he must be aware that for several years now—and there is no reason to believe that there has been a change in the last two years—both Governments have been considering alternative bases in the Middle East—Cyrenaica, Cyprus and elsewhere? Has there been any change?
This question relates to consultation with N.A.T.O. countries. The countries which the right hon. Gentleman mentioned are outside the N.A.T.O. area.
:Surely the hon. Gentleman is aware that Turkey is not outside the N.A.T.O. area, and that Turkey is closely concerned with arrangements in She Middle East?
I am quite aware that Turkey is in N.A.T.O.
:Even if the Government are not discussing this matter with the N.A.T.O. nations, may we take it that the Government themselves are considering some alternative base, having regard to the fact that they have announced—I think I am right in saying this—that they are considering the redeployment of our forces there? If they intend to redeploy them, we should like to know where they are to be redeployed.
The policy of Her Majesty's Government was given to the House in the last foreign affairs debate by the Foreign Secretary.
:Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind the changed attitude of the Israeli people towards this matter and consider a possible agreement with them as to their territory?
:Could the Parliamentary Secretary tell us why he seems to ignore the position of Turkey in N.A.T.O., and whether it is not a question of our being in a position to reinforce Turkey rather than having bases on her territory?
Turkey is our ally in N.A.T.O., and we shall certainly do everything we can to support her.
Communist Countries (Armed Forces)
2.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence if he will now give an estimate of the approximate size of the armed forces of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Communist countries similar to the estimates provided by the Minister of Defence in justification of our rearmament programme in 1951.
Since 1951, the combined strength of the armed forces of the Soviet Union has increased by 150,000 to 4,750,000, and that of the Eastern European satellites by nearly 120,000 to about 1,190,000. The Soviet increase is mainly due to the growth of the Navy. China has armed forces totalling over four million. In addition there are six to 10 million men in the militia.
Can the Minister tell us this: as a result of all our rearmament during the last three years, we are relatively stronger?
Yes. We have something approaching a realistic defence, which we did not possess before.
As my hon. Friend has given the figures for men, could he give the figures for naval ships and submarines?
Not without notice.
Terminal Grants
3.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence the amounts of terminal grants paid to Service men in all the Services after two years' and up to 21 years'service, giving full particulars of how the average sum is made up in each instance.
As the answer contains a table of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the Official Report.
While thanking the Minister for his promise to circulate the full reply in the Official Report, may I ask him whether he considers that the grants are satisfactory, having regard to the length of service which these men perform?
They are long-service grants. Yes, I certainly think they are.
Following is the answer:
Terminal Grants
service is a qualification for the grant, are as follows:—
| £ | |
| Private (and equivalent rank in the other Services) | 100 |
| Corporal (and equivalent rank in the other Services) | 150 |
| Sergeant (and equivalent rank in the other Services) | 200 |
| Staff Sergeant (and equivalent rank in the other Services) | 250 |
| Warrant officer, Class II (and equivalent rank in the other Services) | 275 |
| Warrant officer, Class I (and equivalent rank in the other Services) | 300 |
An invalided Service man who (see ( c) above) is entitled to the grant by virtue of not less than 12 years' reckonable service receives a proportion of the rate for 22 years'service, according to the length of his reckonable service, subject to a minimum grant of £100.
Full details were given in Appendix II of Cmd. 8323 of 1951.
SERVICE GRATUITIES
These are set out in Command Paper 6715 of 1945, paragraphs 34 and 53.